Remember when OpenAI was focusing on building "open" AI? This is a cool mission statement but it doesn't mean anything right now. Everyone loves a minimalist HTML website and guarantees of safety but who knows what this is actually going to shake down to be.
No, lol—Ilya liked ditching the “open” part, he was an early advocate for closed-source. He left OpenAI because he was concerned about safety, felt Sam was moving too fast.
Who could have guessed - attaching springs to your feet makes you run faster. This is the kind of genius scientific insight that's going to ensure the long term survival of the human race.
I mean yeah it's not exactly a novel observation, but there is some subtlety in /how/ you attach springs to your legs which seems to be the primary contribution of the paper. The two naive options - referred to as "in series and in parallel" - don't see the same results as their proposal (which they discuss at some length in the intro). Their proposal is more about making the "springs on your legs" idea as effective as possible by using a hip attachment to adjust the loading/unloading cycle. By loading the spring with your leg while it's in the air you can improve the overall energy throughput of your gait. Other "springs on your feet" concepts (mentioned throughout the comments section) use a loading/unloading cycle that's 180 degrees out of phase with this (leg on the ground is doing the loading).
I've been using Brave (quite happily) for years, I was inspired by their initial mission. Reading this article, hearing that they're implementing "price-tiered AI" (~original~), is so antithetical to what I once thought they stood for that I'm ready to ditch.
This might sound crazy, but the primary purpose of a browser isn't to improve search results with a custom API (almost none of which compare to vanilla Google), but to actually improve the browsing experience. Haven't tried Arc, but from what I've seen it seems like they're actually focusing on UX, which is the kind of thing I'm looking for in a browser.
I had the same impression from the article, and I'm glad you brought up the value of pursuing personal curiosity.
This brings up a central question about the value of collective vs individual knowledge. If you donated your body, would you rather help a lot of people a little or a few people a lot?
If I knew that my body had the power to bring about a truly humbling, enriching, and perspective changing experience to a few individuals, I would be happy with that. In an indirect way, it might be so inspiring for those individuals as to result in a net gain of collective knowledge in the future.
reply